Indemnity Ins. Co. of North America v. Loftis
| Decision Date | 12 May 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 38757,No. 2,38757,2 |
| Parties | INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA et al. v. Miles LOFTIS |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Where in a workmen's compensation case, after an agreement has been entered into between the employer and the claimant, the employer fails to pay and the claimant files application for hearing the burden remains upon the employer to show that there has been a change in condition so as to authorize the entering up of a new award.
2. Neither the superior court nor this court is authorized to reverse an award because in its opinion the prevailing party did not carry the burden of proving a fact necessary to sustain its position if such fact is nevertheless supported by some competent evidence.
3. Where the judgment of the superior court reversing an award of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation is correct it will be affirmed, although the judge of the superior court assigned the wrong reason for his action.
Miles Loftis sustained an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment with Manor Rug Co., diagnosed as 'an acute lumbosacral strain (severe)' on June 25, 1959. Based on an agreement entered into between him and the insurance carrier, he was paid compensation at the rate of $30 per week beginning on July 2, 1959 up to and including October 29, 1959, at which time the insurance carrier ceased to pay compensation and notified the State Board of Workmen's Compensation to this effect on November 25, 1959. On December 5, 1959, the employee applied to the board for a hearing to determine the employer's liability to continue paying compensation. This hearing was held on March 15, 1960, and subsequently thereto the employee and insurance carrier took the depositions of two medical witnesses. On May 3, 1960, the deputy director made an award denying further compensation to the claimant. This award was appealed to the full board, and on June 29, 1960, the board entered an award affirming the award of the deputy director and making his award the award of the majority of the full board. On appeal to the superior court the judge thereof reversed the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, holding that the employer and carrier failed to carry the burden of proof, that the claimant was able to return to work and directed that the matter be recommitted to the board to be decided in accordance with that judgment. The assignment here is to that judgment.
Smith, Field, Ringel, Martin & Carr, Charles L. Drew, Atlanta, for plaintiffs in error.
Pittman, Kinney & Pope, L. Hugh Kemp, H. E. Kinney, Dalton, for defendant in error.
1. In his award the deputy director apparently concluded that the claimant's disability was largely, if not entirely, of a psychic nature. He said: This statement shows a basic misinterpretation of the facts and misconception of the law. The claimant was being paid compensation under an agreement entered into between him and the employer, which agreement was approved by the board and which was based on the fact that the claimant had been injured as the result of an accident arising our of and in the course of his employment. Such an agreement is res judicata 'until a new agreement is entered into between the parties or application is made for a hearing to show a 'change in condition,' or the employer shows a change in condition on a hearing held under Code Ann. § 114-706.' Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Davis, 101 Ga.App. 849, 115 S.E.2d 482. Here the employer, without any order of the Board of Workmen's Compensation and without any authority to do so,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fenwick v. Oklahoma State Penitentiary, 69691
...(Avon 1987).29 See, 1B Larson, "The Law of Workmen's Compensation," p. 7-655-56, § 42.23(a) (1987).30 In Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Loftis, 103 Ga.App. 749, 120 S.E.2d 655-56 (1961).31 See, Bailey v. American Gen. Ins. Co., 154 Tex. 430, 279 S.W.2d 315, 319 (1955); Larson, "Mental and Nervous In......
-
Belcher v. T. Rowe Price Foundation, Inc., 78
...compensable. This observation was made by a dissenting director when the case of Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America v. Loftis, reported in 103 Ga.App. 749, 120 S.E.2d 655, 656 (1961) was before the Workmen's Compensation Board on review. It is quoted with approval by the court in its ......
-
Southwire Co. v. George
...physical occurrence." Hanson Buick v. Chatham, 163 Ga.App. 127, 129, 292 S.E.2d 428 (1982). See also Indemnity Ins. Co. of N.A. v. Loftis, 103 Ga.App. 749(1), 120 S.E.2d 655 (1961) (a mental disability is compensable if brought on by an accident and physical injury); Brady v. Royal Manufact......
-
Waters v. National Biscuit Co.
...accident and injury, this being a humane law and liberally construed, it is nevertheless compensable.' Indemnity Ins. Co. of N. A. v. Loftis, 103 Ga.App. 749, 751, 120 S.E.2d 655, 656; Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Archer, 108 Ga.App. 563, 564, 134 S.E.2d The evidence discussed above showed a ......
-
Workers' Compensation - H. Michael Bagley, Daniel C. Kniffen, John G. Blackmon, Jr., and Phillip Comer Griffeth
...Inc. v. Chatham, 163 Ga. App. 127, 292 S.E.2d 428 (1982). 123. George v. Southwire Co., 217 Ga. App. 586, 458 S.E.2d 362 (1995). 124. 103 Ga. App. 749, 120 S.E.2d 655 (1961). 125. 217 Ga. App. at 587-88, 458 S.E.2d at 363. Note also that O.C.G.A. Sec. 34-9-23, created July 1, 1994, provides......